Skip to main content
5:00 pm
is creating a backlash. for example, it was said that the unmanned strikes is greater than the what they can appreciate. they are hated on a viss rational level. he add them. it is not just a kinetic solution. as we look at this hell -- at sahel, this is an area where al qaeda can put down roots beyond the reaches of government. they have done this and it has been unattended because of the difficulties these countries have feeding their people. it is a different strategy -- it he said this adds to the perception of americans that said we can fly where we want, she what we want because we can. general haig in also has expressed concerns that now that the strikes are being used at lower levels, arguably, that they are creating a backlash that is undermining the credibility of government and creating new terrorists when a has become prats of one, but al qaeda -- and the force of islamic extremists that have preferred it islam are making some progress in areas that give me a real concern. that is why look at syria and what is going on in that country, we cannot allow vast areas to be exported by al qaeda in these areas because it will be to our peril. >> i certainly agree with you on that, and in our testified
5:01 pm
neighbor or family member is killed in the course of the operations. do you agree with general mcchrystal and director hayden about the backlash of strikes from the targeted killings at this point? i am not talking about the initial strikes. >> that is something that we need to be mindful of in terms of reaction, any type of u.s. hearing next week i will ask you about syria and also the iranian threat. i do not think those are corporate in open session. just two final questions -- one has to do with priories that .ou have said in recent years paramilitary operations had consumed a lot of counter-terrorism activities that involve the dropping of ordnance. whether it is a remotely piloted aircraft or man, we need to take that into account, but i would not agree with those statements because what we have found in many areas is that the people are being held hostage to outcry that in these areas and have welcomed the work that the government has done to rid them of the al qaeda cancer that resources, expertise, time, energy, and efforts at the cia. do you believe this has been at the expense of traditional cia responsibility collection, analysis, all sorts? >> there have been opportunity costs because of the dedication of those resources. i would inventory our our resources are being dedicated
5:02 pm
exists. >> finally today, this committee received the olc memos justification, labo that, many of us who have been on the committee longer than i, have been seeking for some time, and i to have spent a large part of this morning reading them. yet the obama administration within months of taking office released several olc memos against a wide variety of strategic priorities to protect our country. in terms of operational collection activities worldwide, the analysis being done, what are we doing in these other areas? yber -- are so many different areas. there is an in this section to encounter is press there is an counter-tion between kantor describing the legal justification for the treatment of terrorist detainees in u.s. custody. do you think it was appropriate that a different standard was applied to the release of the memos from the bush administration than those produced by the obama administration? >> i do not think there was a different standard. >> one was released within four terrorism and these other areas. >> mr. brennan, you have devoted a great deal of your life to public service, for which i thank you. and you obviously understand the world of intelligence in a way that few people do. you have been an intelligence professional for much of your
5:03 pm
months of the obama administration taking office. the other had been requested for a very long -- a much longer time. >> i am not a lawyer. i have come to learn of the term dui generis. the olc memos released after the president came into office were released because the program was terminated. olc wiolll counsel professional life. in the last four years, you have held a political position at the white house. and i have been talking to people at the cia, whom i respect, and one intelligence official told me that a key question for the men and women of the cia is which john brennan are they going to get. opinions, and those opinions were looked at in a different way because of the sui generis circumstances. >> both are essential for the ability of congress to carry its oversight responsibilities. finally, the intelligence reform act and terrorist prevention act of 2004, with which you are very are they going to get john brennan who has been the right- hand adviser a president obama any political lighthouse, and, by the nature of the position, i do not say that critically. that is the position. where are they going to get john brennan, who was a career cia officer, who worked his way up in the ranks? and the concern is that they want to hear that you are going to be the cia's representative
5:04 pm
familiar and which i was a co- author, requires the director of national intelligence to recommend who the cia director should be to the president of the united states. i am aware of general clapper, the dni's letter, endorsing your nomination, which is different from his actually recommending to the white house, about the white house's representative to the cia. ike is want to give you the opportunity today to respond to that concern. i would note that i also heard a very good comments from people with whom i talk, but i think it is in accordance -- it is to the president that you be chosen. to your knowledge, did general clapper recommend to the president that he be nominated for this position? >> i know for certain that he made a recommendation, but i would defer to general clapper to tell you what that recommendation is. >> thank you. cent >> senator heinrich? >> thank you for your service to important that you are wrong to be the leader of the agency and not the white house's agent within the agency. >> thank you, senator. if i were to be honored to go out to see eye, the cia would get the john brennan who is either a democrat nor republican, or has ever been. the john cornyn who has a deep
5:05 pm
this country and welcome you to the committee. and should you be confirmed, i would like to start by just inviting you to visit to mexico at some point and in particular sandia and los alamos national labs, because while you often do not hear about the contributions they make to our intelligence community, i can assure you that that support is vital to keeping our nation safe. i have a few questions, and forgive me if some of these appreciation, respect, and the intelligence profession, one who has been fortunate to have lived in 25 years, a john cornyn who has had the great fortune to be in the white house the past four years watching an understanding how intelligence is used in support of our national security. cia would get a john cornyn view has been working national- security issues for my life, and return to some of the think you have heard from other senators. i want to start with your november 2007 interview with cbs news, where he said, "there have been a lot of information that has come out of these interrogation procedures that the agency has in fact used against the real hard-core terrorists. other intelligence officials what a lot further than that in defending the use of so-called enhanced interrogation would get a john cornyn hoop understands that the value of intelligence, the importance of this intelligence is not to tell the president what he wants to hear, not to tell this committee what he wants to hear, to tell the policy makers, the congressional overseers what they need to hear. but the intelligence committee with all its expertise has been able to uncover and understand
5:06 pm
techniques at the time, and some still do. if your review of the committee consists that these did not in fact save lives, i would like to ask would you be as public into condemning the program as you were in its defense, and, in other words, would you set the record straight? >> i will do whatever possible to make sure that the record is straight and that i speak fully and honestly on it. about world events that fundamentally affect the lives of not just this generation of americans, but of future generations of americans. if i had the great privilege to lead the cia, it would be the biggest honor of my life, and i would understand just how important and we keep that would be. if i ever dishonored that responsibility, i cannot at myself in the mirror. i could not look my family in the mirror. i could not look you in the >> i want to return to a question that mr. udall asked you. would you object to, and if so, why, to a public release to a declassified version of the committee's report? >> i would give such a request for declassification every consideration. there is a lot of information and those volumes with a lot of potential consequences as far as face, and that is something that is important, so the proof will be in the pudding, and if i have that opportunity, it would be my intention to make sure i did everything possible to live up to the trust, confidence, that this congress, this senate, and this presents might place in me. >> thank you very much. thank you, madam chairman. >> that you very much. if there are no " for the courses, john, i would like to
5:07 pm
its public release. at the same time that we have a commitment to take care to, we also have a tremendous commitment to making sure that we keep this country safe by protecting its secrets. there are a lot of equities and operational activities, and it has to be looked at carefully. >> i would just say i agree with you that sources and methods and many of the operational details absolutely should never be declassified, but there is some associate myself with what john rockefeller said. i have sat through a number of these hearings. i do not think i have ever heard anyone more forthright or more honest or more direct. you really did not hedge. he said what you thought. i want you to know that that is very much appreciated. i actually think you are going to be a fine and strong leader for the cia. i cannot help but say i am basic principles in that report that i think is gonna be very important for history to be able to judge. i would urge you to look closely at that. senator levin asked about waterboarding. let me follow up. in november to a dozen, you were -- 2007, you were asked if waterboarding with torture, and you said it is objecting an individual to severe pain and suffering, which is the classic definition of torture. i believe quite frankly is really fully supportive of this and will do everything i can possibly to make sure this committee works with you, closely and honestly. we will have a classified hearing. i am specifically going to just warn you that i would like to talk -- or have you respond in detail to what i perceive as a difficult, the evolving situation in north africa, now
5:08 pm
inconsistent with american values and should be prohibited. is that still your view? >> yes, senator, it is very >> they keep. the you think all agencies of the united states government should be held to interrogation centers that are laid out in the army field manual as currently required by executive ordr, and you support efforts to codify this into law? with tunisia, with libya, with all these countries, and certainly with mali, and how you plan to direct the agency to deal with this devolving momentum that is taking place in northern africa. so that will be for tuesday, and at the request of senator levin, i ask unanimous consent to add into the record a joint statement that he and i may, on >> the fbi has its own processes and procedures and law that covers its activities, so i wanted to do is to make sure appropriate attention is paid to fbi as opposed to military. >> i understand. back in 2006, you were part of an on-line discussion with "the washington post," he suggested at that time that the director of the cia should have a set five-year term, like the fbi april 27, 2012, and, secondly, in order to have mr. brennan's answers to questions for the record by the time he returns before us in closed session, i ask members to the right questions for the record by 5:00 p.m. tomorrow. that is friday, february 8, so we have them for you as soon as we i want to thank you and your
5:09 pm
director. the guarantee "absolute need for independence, integrity, and up to give the in the senior ranks of our intelligence community? given that you will serve at the pleasure of the president, how do you maintain your independence? >> having grown up in the community for 25 years, i understand the importance and value at maintaining independence, subject to the, and integrity of the process. family for being here. i wish you well. thank you and the hearing is adjourned. >> thank you. i know when i have sat in the white house situation room and when i have looked to the intelligence briefer, that if they were to advocate in any way a policy preference, it calls into question the independence, subject to the, and basis of that intelligence. i want them to give me the facts as is, in respect of what their leanings or preferences might be. policy makers need to do that. in order to me to be able to
5:10 pm
maintain my integrity, as i would go to the president, secretary of state, or the national security council meeting, i need to make sure i can say it straight, get it straight, and that the policymakers determine the best course of action. >> thank you. one last question. i believe it was during that same discussion with "the washington post" he said, "i think there is an effort underway for the cia to adapt to >> john brennan has the counterterrorism advisory for your years and now nominate background the president to be the c.i.a. director. the new realities of the intelligence community. the cia has resisted any of these changes which has been a problem. it is time to move forward." what exactly did you mean and has the cia in progress? >> i credit you and your staff for following up that interview, because i had not read about that or thought about that for a while. i must say having grown up in the agency for 25 years, i have tremendous respect for that we're wrapping up four hours of testimony. we're opening up the phone lines to find out about the issues discussed and if he noub the next c.i.a. director. the numbers are on your screen. you see the hashtag on the screen is brennan. we have also posted a section on
5:11 pm
organization. it is exceptionally capable, competent, by nature of its work, it also at times is insular and it has not interacted and into operated the way it needs to with the rest of the intelligence community and government. at times that is to protect methods and the secrets it has. but given the changes in the environment, given the changes in the nature of our government, cia needs to play a part in this our facebook page, let's go to joyce in florida on our directs line. caller: hi. first of all, let me say that i am very, very proud. i've been watching brennan for many, many years in different positions. isle a political science major and i'm so proud he knows large a role. now the head of cia does not sit on top of the key intelligence community, but is part of a larger community that is led by another. my objective is to make sure our capabilities are leveraged and and power to responsibilities, the missions of the rest of the government, the department of the homeland security is a new creation, and they need intelligence like everyone else. when i was conveying is there was resistance at the time of the rgpa that they did not want thousand answer the questions. he was so well-informed. as an american and someone who has learned to trust some of our leaders but not all, that is one person that i can go to bed at night and feel very comfortable in the way he looks at things. i'm a democrat. what he says, i'm not a democrat or republican, i truely believe that about him. i believe he loves this country
5:12 pm
to break some of the past practices. a lot of that resistance is overcome, and cia analyses the benefit of having someone sit on top of that committee. >> that is very helpful. i will yield back. >> that you very much, senator. senator king? you want to turn on your mike? >> thank you for your testimony and stamina to date. i should tell you in an earlier hearing secretary panetta was and there are some things he can't say and i respect that. he's able to communicate in such a way that a person can understand where he's kimming from. i think in general, this is -- he's coming from. i think in general this is what america needs. in some days i feel like i need -- know more than some those senator who is are reading. testifying before the armed services committee, and he strongly endorsed your nomination. i think the record church show that, that secretary panetta was very complementary at your capabilities and experience. secondly, and this is not really a question, it is incredibly important for the cia to be as open, to be totally opens with >> that is senator feinstein and there is another hearing on tuesday which will be classified. we go to the republican line. caller: i'm impressed with the quality of this candidate. i'm grateful for his education and there is no comparison between the quality of this man and chuck hagel. they are in different sandboxes.
5:13 pm
this committee. the reason is that there is no one else watching. typically and our country, we have public -- the public is involved, the press involved, there are a lot of people that have access to intermission to what the department of state or commerce is doing. this is a unique situation where this committee and house are the only places where they are paying attention in terms of separation of powers. is not just nice to have that openness. i'm very grateful for people like this who we desperately need in times like this. >> we go to the independent line. this is doug, welcome to the conversation. caller: thanks for taking my call and thanks to c-span. i think the only one that had any sanity and knew the questions that were going to be asked. we did not get any answers to them. how is the decision made? it is critically important, and i hope you subscribe to that view. >> absolutely, i do. >> briefly, and i think senator border touched on this, going forward, there needs to be some discussion with the department of defense about where the cia and and the department of defense starts in terms of counter-terrorism activities, operations, and i do not want to pursue that, but i think senator border weight or -- raised an what are the requirements? the independent said we should have a court that regardless who the president is they should not have a unilateral way to document nominate someone.
5:14 pm
important part, because we cannot be duplicated a whole set of capabilities and priorities and officers and procedures. i take you subscribe to that? >> i do agree, and look forward to you in coast section 2 looked and talk to you about the areas where the relationship of these agencies are critically important. mindful of not having any type of redundant capabilities, we people in this country don't know about the mddaa, the national defense thorgs act which allows the president to designate a person who he feels is a terrorist or supporting terrorist organizations to deprive him of life, liberty and not be able to go in front of a court. you can't say listen, you have the wrong person. we can be unilaterally detained. there is no question about, for instance, the propaganda guy need to make sure we can leverage the capabilities in both organizations for the good of this country. >> and the area i want to spent time on is that iran policy as it relates to the american citizens. there is a lot of law and history involved in our system of checks and balances. james madison said people were angels we would not need a government, and if the government was run by angels, we would not need checks and that got killed. his 16-year-old son, just turned 16. he went to where there was no real journalism was going on there and he wanted to find out how many people wanted to be killed. the u.n. says it has about 2,700
5:15 pm
balances. he concluded that angels were in short supply, as they are today. we need checks and balances. the fifth amendment is clear. note deprivation of life and liberty without due process of law, and we are depriving americans of their life when we target and in a drug attack picked i understand it is under military circumstances. these are the enemy combatants. i would like to suggest to you that you consider, and madame chairman, i would like to people are being killed. he went out there to find out. whether or not he was radicalized by his father, we helped to use a drone against a 17-year-old. nobody called in about that. >> thank for your thoughts. we will re-air the entire hearing for you here on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. we hear from cory on the suggest that we consider a fi set-type crisis -- a fisa-type court process where an american citizen is what the targeted for a lethal strike, but having the executive being the prosecutor, judge, jury, an executioner all in one is very contrary to traditions and of this country, democrats line. hi, cory. are you there? we'll go to michael in north carolina also an independent. >> good evening. my name is mike and i would like to address the senator from oregon on drilling mr. brennan. the way he has been and i find it totally, totally -- i can't say how -- when they take a
5:16 pm
particularly in a situation where there is time. if a soldier on a battlefield does not have time to go to court, if you are planning to strike over a matter of days, weeks, or months, there is an opportunity to at least go to some outside of the executive branch body leica fisa cc -- like the fisa court make a case that this citizen is an enemy swear that they are going to take an oath to defend the united states foreign and domestic, that does not say they are going to put boots on the grounds. when they make them take that oath, it doesn't matter. if they have happen to be on the wrong side at the time when the chips are down, they are a combatants and at least that would be some check on the activities of the second. i have great confidence in you, and president obama, but all the lessons of history, it should not matter who is in charge, because we should have procedures and processes in place that will protect us no matter who the people are that are in the particular positions. how do you react to the suggestion? >> it is worthy of discussion. target. i'm hoping for comment. host: thank you for that. senator feinstein asked a number of times of the so-called targeting killings, these drone strikes. here's what john brennan had to say during one of the exchanges. >> i would like to ask you about the status of the administration's efforts to institutionalize rules and
5:17 pm
addition, judicial tradition, is that a court of law is used. this is very different from the decisions made on the battlefield as well as actions taken against terrorists, because none of those actions are to determine pass the guilt for actions they took. the decisions that are made, or to take action so we prevent a future action, to protect procedures for the conduct of drone strikes. in particular, how you see your role as c.i.a. director in that approval process. >> as this committee knows and i'm sure wants to continue to protect certain covert action activities, but let me talk about the counterterrorism program and the role of c.i.a. and this effort to try to american lives. that is inherently an executive- branch function to determine, and the commanders and chiefs and executive at the responsibility to protect the american citizens. we have wrestled with this in terms of whether they can be a fisa-like court. certain types of activities -- but it is analogous to a court going -- institutionalize and ensure that we have a riggerous process as possible. we feel that we're taking the appropriate actions at the appropriate time. the president has insisted that any action we take will be legally groumeded and thoroughly be anchored in intelligence has the approval process before any action is contemplated, including those actions that
5:18 pm
>> action we take our to take actions against individuals where we believe the intelligence base is so strong and the nature of the threat is so grave and serious as well as imminent that we have no recourse except to take this action that may involve a lethal strike. >> i agree, and i and the stand the dilemma. i am not suggesting anything that would limit our ability to take actions, a behalf of american citizens. i would feel comfortable if might require force. my role was to help to okay straight this over the past four years to ensure any actions we take fully conform with our law and meet the standards that i think the committee and the american people expect of us. as far as taking the actions to protect the american people but at the same time, we do everything we can before we have somebody other than a member of the executive said we agree the evidence is so strong, etc., as he stated, and in the hamdi decision, sandra day o'connor said a state of war is not a heck. of c >> the point of due process needs to be taken into account. american citizens by definition to resort to legal force. >> some response on twitter, here's david who writes that brennan stonewalls in fort hood shooter involved with anwar al-awlaki. clearly he did. another tweet from anita. people have miscon stheapings he was an upstanding citizen. back to calls we go to benny who
5:19 pm
are due much greater due process by their citizenship. this is a worthwhile discussion. what is and a corporate balance between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches responsibilities in this area. >> i appreciate your consideration, and again, appreciate your testimony today, and thank you for your service to this country. madam chairman, i yield back my time. >> thank you very much. is in fredics berg, virginia. caller: this is outstanding and i usually don't understand these hearings because they are so political and bipartisan and a lot of the people just grandstanding back and forth. but i believe this gentleman is one of the best qualified persons i've heard in a hearing. we will do another quick round. i think one of the problems is now that the drone program is so public, and one american citizen has been caught up, people did not know much about this one american citizens, so call. if they do not know what he has been doing. they do not know what he is connected to. they do not know the incitement he has stirred up. i wonder if you could tell us a little bit about mr. awlaki and i want to also talk about the secret briefings he gave those committees. you have more leaks in the government there than you do on the street. third, while killing americans, you have to defend this country foreign and domestic. if you choose to join al qaeda, you choose to join al qaeda to hurt americans you should be put
5:20 pm
what he had been doing. >> i am not going to talk about any particular operation or responsibility for anything whenever. >> that is the problem. when people hear american citizens, they think somebody who is an upstanding, and this man was not standing by a longshot. maybe you cannot discuss it here, but i have read enough to know that he was a real problem. away. thank you. >> steve is an independent caller in michigan. >> i want to repeat what the last gentleman said. i'm a junkie on these things. this hearing demonstrated the highest kinds of ways our government should work. the questions were on point, there's was little grandstanding. there was no politicking that i could see. people did have their points compared to the haguele hearings >> before he died he was intimately involved in activities that were designed to kill innocent men, women, and children, and mostly americans. he was not just a propagandist. he was in fact part of the operational effort that is known as al qaeda in the arabian peninsula and hackie responsibilities in that regard. >> can i ask some questions last week. this was the highest and i'm afraid the ones for hagel had to do with the quality of the candidates, particularly, mr. brennan. >> given the fact that was sensitive information. do you feel like you learned a lot from the hearing? caller: yes, i guess i learned more about brennan than i knew. he appears to be, at least by reputation in the way they talked about him that he's not
5:21 pm
about him? did he have a connection to abdul muttalab who intended to explode a device over detroit? >> yes, he did. >> could you tell us what condition it was? >> i would prefer not to at this time. >> did he have a connection to the fort hood attack? >> al qaeda in the arabian going to be so secretive as some of the past c.i.a. directors have been. i'm sure there are things he committed to that he went be able to do. >> he spent time in the c.i.a. and he was former executive deputy director from 2001-2003. bill is on the republican line. bill, hello. caller: how are you? peninsula as a variety of means of communicating and inciting individuals, whether that be websites, emails, or other types of things. there are a number of occasions where individuals has been in touch with other individuals. senator, i will not address the specifics of these, but -- >> i will ask you a couple questions. did shazzad, who pled guilty to >> fine, thanks. caller: good. i was calling in reference to the senator from oregon here. calling upon certain questions to brennan. he has had such a great, great background in his service to america. i'm embarrassed that we have to go through all of this but for him, i appreciate the
5:22 pm
the times square bombing attempt, tell that he was inspired by al-awlaki? >> yes. >> last october, awlaki, if he had a role in supervising aqap by detonating explosive,, as a condolences as far as john brennan being accepted at the c.i.a. district perp but back to the commission -- the senators of that question. i have questions for them too. i'm embarrassed because he is such -- he has served this country in a magnificent way. nobody can doubt that. this is a process that we have to go through and i'm all for it. as far as the positive, yes, matter of fact coming inside a computer printer cartridge? >> he was involved in overseeing a number of these activities, yes, there was a relationship. >> was a tree they were so concealed that the first attempt find them?d not >> yes the method used was one this is a man who is very highly qualified. he is more qualified than anyone else. it is great that c-span put together this kind of thing and letting americans see what you put on here. i was impressed with c-span's coverage of this. without c-span i would not be able to make choice and i appreciate you guys coverage of
5:23 pm
of the best we had ever encountered. >> so mr. awlaki is by not an american citizen by where anyone in america would be proud? >> he was part of al qaeda and it was his determination to kill americans on behalf of al qaeda. >> thank you. is it true that in the last four years the fbi has arrested 100 all of this. and you make america rocks and rolls and we all honor that. this is a process that we have to go through. it has to be frustrating for a lot of people. the guy is beyond acceptable for the job. >> we'll let you go there, bill. thank for watching. one of our followers on twitter who tweets that at the hearing people, either planning, conspiring, or trying to commit a terrorist attack on this nation? >> yes, they have arrested a lot of people. >> that is because of good, sound intelligence. i think what people forget is that they will kill us if they can and it is extraordinarily difficult if you cannot get into where they were hiding. the senator sees worried about not being able to torture people. here's a clip where they ask about the interrogation techniques. >> well, it looks like we had a problem with that video. tom is a democrat in burbank, california. tom, hello, you're next on the air. go ahead.
5:24 pm
would it have been possible to awlakirested hav mr. where he was in the yemen? >> we work very closely with yemenis to see if we can arrest in vigils. if we can, we want to do that because it is valuable for us. caller: good afternoon. someone who had top secret clearance in the past i have to say some of the more interesting subtext was eleven -- levin about the letter about the iraqi war, the comments that wyden made about what needs to be any actions taken in concert with the yemeni government are done in terms of any types of strikes we might engage there with them, are done only because we do not have the ability to bring those individuals into custody. >> thank you. my time is up. senator chambliss? >> thanks, adam chair. in 2002 what was your knowledge of interrogation videotapes about zabeda, and did you see any information about a review revealed. and the senator saying she had been lied to over all of these years. it the most interesting fact is he was asked if he would reveal to the people and declassify to the public all the foreign countries that we've had a hand in removing someone with warfare. he said they would look into that. historically would include,
5:25 pm
of them in 2002? >> i do not have their recollection of that, senator. >> of the tapes or that request? >> at the time in 2002, i did not know what my involvement or knowledge was at the time. i believe i was aware of the briefings being taped. >> it should be no surprise that chile, guatemala, it would include the kinds of of the i think that were written in a book as a former agency director in south america. i'm curious how far and deep they will go. i went into this and i was able to be home and watch the entire hearings. i realize listening to both republican and democratic senators, the reality is it is not fair to keep mr. brennan's many members have been dissatisfied with the administration's corp. on the benghazi inquiries c. senator graham ast director clapper if he was aware of the attacks in the summer of 2012 and asked if he had informed the president about those attacks. that seemed like a reasonable question, and dni said we would confirmation hostage to a disagreement between the thedges committee and the white house, either this current one or past white houses. i will wait to see what more comes out and what other people have to say. thank you to c-span. hearing the hearing without talking heads, with no other network, someone trying to tell me what i just heard when i know what i just head.
5:26 pm
be given an answer. when we got an answer back from the dni's of us, there was a notation next to this particular question that senator graham asked, and here is what it said -- per nss, no response required. mr. brennan, that is your shop. do you have any knowledge about why senator graham's question you continue to be a valuable input and valueable service to the country and democracy and the understanding of the difficult things we're facing in this world today. thank you again. >> the hearing went about three and half hours. it was interrupted by code pink protesters on the floor of the hearing and senator feinstein finally clearing the chamber out. we'll give you a chance to see it again at 8:00 p.m. eastern. let's check facebook. was not to be answered? >> there is a longstanding tradition understanding of respecting the executive privilege that exists in the presidency in terms of what information is provided to the president or advice, counsel, to him. i would suspect that that question gets into this issue of the executive privilege which i think again has been a long sheryl says love or hate him one cannot deny that john brennan knows his stuff. let's hear from luck buck, texas. >> thank you for taking my call. i listened to hagel and brennan's testimony. being from the c.i.a. community when i was in vietnam, both of these gentleman had
5:27 pm
standing tradition. >> are you sure that is the answer or to you think? >> i do not understand, because that will not be a request coming to me. >> i understand, so my direction to you, at what i ask you, is that you review that. we will get you the and -- we will get youppi if necessary., efficient ca distinguished themselves. i have to fols my people in texas -- apologize to my people in texas. this committee was professional. the last one was not. thank you. >> some of the video you're seeing earlier of those protesters being evicted from the hearing. one more call from michigan on the republican line. caller: my uncle knew that man. alice told us it was detainee information that was key to them finding the courier and bin laden. were you briefed by any of the analysts who track down bin laden? >> before the operation? but yes. >> yes, absolutely. >> is that the information given he wasn't very fond of him. >> john brennan? >> yes. one question i would like to hear him answer is why he declared fort hood workplace violence knowing he would rob the soldiers of their right for a purple heart when they got injured there. it is beyond me. they also don't inherit the benefits they would have gotten with the purple heart.
5:28 pm
to you, that it came from interrogation of detainees on whom eip's had been used? >> i cannot recall. they talked about the chain of collection that took place related to the information coming from the detainees. he called it workplace violence while america held its jaws open. and o -- obama reports back to him. >> on this workplace decision you said that it because decision that brennan made? caller: brennan and obama together. >> do you agree with secretary panetta's comments? >> senator, looking at this document from ssci, i do not know what the facts are or the tree is. i really need to look at that carefully and see what cia's response is. the report called into question whether any information was unique. >> fair and up. >> thank you for checking in. you can take a look on facebook and the hashtag is brennan. we're going to give you a chance to see the entire hearing at 8:00 p.m. we're going to take you to president obama speaking to democrats in leesburg, virginia. we're getting a preview to the state of the union for next week he talked about gun control and immigration. it is about 20 minutes.
5:29 pm
hawk secretary comment's are in direct -- you told me a couple days ago when we met that the study was not objective, and it was a prosecutor's brief. written with an eye toward finding problems. you went on to say your [cheers and applause] >> thank you. fired up? let me just say to all of the leaders gathered here today, because we are here as leaders withholding judgment until you read the response. my understanding is from what he said, that is what you are going to do. suppose the cia takes a position and finds that the conclusions are wrong. i know john cornyn well enough to note that you are quick to stand up and say what is on your mind and what ever you conclude. i am not want to ask you for response to that, but i know will give us your thoughts for the 310 million americans who cannot be in washington every day to cast votes, to change this country for the better. they have asked us, they have given us the privilege to do that for them. we're hear, minds focused, sleeves rolled up, because we know we have work to do. we know we need to have a leader
5:30 pm
and opinions about cia's response to it and how we move forward with this. >> i will do that. >> thank you very much. , senator wyden. -- i mean senator rockefeller. and chair.u, of this country who is ready to get to work. my friends, i don't think there is any doubt in november, the american people decided they knew who they wanted to be their leader for the next four years. [cheers and applause] we are very pleased that today we convey a message to our president, barack obama that we are ready to work. i was does make a comment to the chair, mr. brennan, that i have been through a whole lot of confirmation hearings in 28 years here, including quite a few cia directors. i quite honestly do not recall anybody who is more forthright, more direct, more accommodating we see what it means to work. under the leadership of our leader and then speaker nancy pelosi we work with president obama to make sure we turn -- we turn an economy that was hemorrhaging 800,000 jobs a month. we have turned it into a economy that has created 6 million jobs over the last three years. under the leadership of
5:31 pm
without violating who you are, more open to the possibility of working with this committee in a way that will do two things -- one, that will give the folks at cia who probably constantly worry about what is the next awful thing that we are on to say about them, but that is not our intention because we are into the business of problem solving, and if we have a 26,000-pasting, it is not fun for us if we are trying to solve a problem. president obama and our leader nancy pelosi, we have helped 105 million americans who no longer have to fear if their child contracts diabetes or in an accident that they will run out of insurance before that child is ready to go back to living a regular life. under this president, we told hundreds of thousands of young americans that they can dream was and no longer be separated i have a feeling you understand that, you have a feeling that you feel the cia, if they felt they were working in -- with some contention with the oversight committee in the senate, but that the senate was involved, was informed, interested, that this would be something they would welcome. that there are a lot of people over at the cia who may be from their families because they came through no fault of their own to this country without immigration documents. so, my fellow americans and fellow democrats, are we ready to tell our president, barack obama, that we're ready to work? are we ready to tell our president that we're ready to lead with him and take on the major challenges? because i remember what a good
5:32 pm
stuck in that midlife crisis, etc., who are looking for an open, fresh, a strong leader. i happen to think you are that leader. i have felt that since our conversation. i felt that from before our conversation. and we have not had our secret meeting yet, so -- i am sure i am not going to change my mind. friend and neighbor of mine always said to his children. he used to tell his daughter when his daughter and my daughter were playing t-ball and then little league ball. vanessa, wait until that young pitcher throws the ball wait outside the plate and take the first base after you walk or you can be a hitter. you can try to smack that ball. i think you have done an extraordinary job of patience, courtesy, weston, and the only question you could not answer that i am aware of is who was it that took notes on the meeting that you had 20 years ago. but i find it in my heart to forgive you for that. to me, i think you are a terrific leader, and i will look if you don't always hit it, don't worry. if you're a hitter, you will success -- succeed. i think we're ready to tell america that the house of representatives are full of leaders that are ready to be hitters. [cheers and applause] we know that on our team, on america's team, we got the best cleanup hitter in the world and it is with great pride that i
5:33 pm
forward to tuesday, i thank you tarp the guy for the job and the only guy for the job. and, senator, for this very kind words, and i have not lived up .t. itm yet, is a daunting task to go to cia. i want every member of this introduce you to the captain of the america's team, the person who will help us hit out of the park when it comes to gun safety. the person who will score the points we need when we have a broken immigration system to one that will work for all americans. and we have a leader that will help put america back to work. give a warm welcome to the committee to be defender of the men and women of the cia, and i see it as my obligation to represent them to you on their behalf, so when times get tough and when people are going to be criticizing the crist cia, i have all of you to say you knew about what the cia were doing, and you will defend them. >> thank you. senator burr? >> i will be brief because i president of the united states barack obama. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you, everybody. have a seat. have a seat. thank you for that very gracious
5:34 pm
notice you are on your fourth glass of water and i do not want to be accused of waterboarding you. [laughter] with the exception of our request for the presidential daily briefs around the time of benghazi, which there was executive privilege claim, the you know of any, other claim of the state of privilege on the documents that this committee is waiting on now? introduction and you're outstanding leadership. let me begin by saying that i could not be happier that one of my most important friends and partners is still leading our democrats in the house of representatives. i love nancy pelosi. give her a big round of applause >> i know there are requests for emails that might have taken place between the intelligence community and the white house, and so there are a number of elements that i think people are looking at. >> but none that existed privilege have been claymont? >> i am not a position to say that, and i would defer to those individuals, the white house counsel, to make those determinations about what they want to -- >> they have not testified not . [cheers and applause] i love nancy pelosi. also, she just generates good-looking grand babies. they are so handsome and sharp, and beautiful. to hoyer and jim as well as javier, thank you for the great
5:35 pm
producing those documents on its eight of privilege. if they are brought to claim it, they need to clean it quick. on january 13 of this year, president obama signed into law the 2013 intelligence authorization act which requires notification of any disclosure of national intelligence. we have not received any notification of authorized disclosures. have there been any authorized disclosures, to your knowledge? work that you guys are doing each afternoon day. to steve israel who worked tirelessly to bring on 49 new outstanding members of this caucus. [cheers and applause] i am looking forward to spending time with all 49 of you. hopefully we'll see you at the white house and at various >> since you have not received any notification, there have not been. , which consider the information reported about the cameras and playback an authorized disclosure? >> i do not know which piece you're talking about. there has many of the discussion in the media and in the newspapers about this. i do not know specifically about any classified information. the fact that the administration events but i know you came here to get something done. i look forward to working with you every single day to do what is right by the people who sent us here. i changed the format here. originally the way this is scheduled, i'm was going to talk and shake some hands and i thought since this is not a shy bunch. it might make sense for me to
5:36 pm
may be going through a process to institutionalize, guess rigorous as possible our processes and procedures in an of itself is not a classified issue. those details that are classified, i do not know of any that came out in some of those reports. >> if there are classified information that is out there, and it was not authorized, was there a crime report filed relative to the play book? take some questions and advice, i'm sure you guys have for me. what i'm going to do is make a few points a the top and what i would like is maybe somebody can come up here and you can call on folks and we'll spend a little time with q&a before i have a chance to say hello to everybody. i want to keep my remark short because i made a pretty long >> presumably there was, senator. those decisions as far as initiating investigations are done by those agencies that have stuart ship of that information. in discussions with the department of justice, to make a determination whether or not unlike of the fact that maybe some many people have access to it, how they can proceed with criminal investigations. >> as we prepare for the closed hearing on monday, -- on tuesday speech a couple weeks ago. i'm about to make another one next week and i don't want you guy tired of me. but, obviously, i'm deeply grateful to be re-elected and i'm humbled by the support that i received from all across the country. [cheers and applause] and i said at the breakfast this
5:37 pm
-- is a -- i will ask you today that you be prepared to provide for the committee any specific discussions that you have where you are authorized to reveal classified information or to talk about information on covert action, not something i would like to do today. the answer may be zero. if there are things tuesday, it would be an opportunity to provide. that was a question from a pre- morning and i was telling the truth, i general am humbled. the longer you're in this job the more humble you get. you recognize your own imperfections and you try to make it up with effort and hard work. those gaps in your personality or your intelligence become so hearing question that was on an answer. my last question is i am still not clear on whether you think the information from cia interrogations save lives. have you ever made a representation to a court, including a fisa court, but the type and importance of information learned from and in full -- learn from detainees? >> the first question, if i apparent to everybody on "the day lis news" every day. as important it is to be humble by the privilege of this office and the privilege of serving in the congress, even if it is important not to read too much into any particular political victory. this country is big, diverse,
5:38 pm
believe there has that information if-- >> whether i was clear. all i am not clear at this time because i read a report that calls into question a lot of information that i was provided earlier on. when i was in the government as the head of national counter- terrorism center, i know that i and we don't have a mon notly on wisdom. we need to remember that. despite all of those things, it is important for us to feel confident and bold about the values we care about and what we stand for. i try to do that in any inauguration speech and i'm hoping we do that over the next four years. when i think about what means to had signed out a number of affirmations related to the continuation of certain programs based on the analysis and intelligence that was available. i do not know exactly what it was at the time, but we can look at that. but the committee can assume that you had faith -- if you court, youlaim to lefcoura be a democrat, in this day and age, i start with the basic proposition that we're all created equal. we're all endowed by our creator with certain rights. and my governing philosophy and my interest in public service grows out how we make that union
5:39 pm
had faith in the documents and in the information that was supplied you to make that declaration? , absolutely. if i made such affirmation, i would have faith that the information provided was an accurate representation. >> thank you very much. >> thank you senator the very much. >> that you, senator. we have talked for several hours now about the question of targeted killings of americans, and you have heard it from a number of senators. more perfect for people day in and day out. that starts with an economy that works for everybody. throughout many campaigns we talked about this bedrock notion that our economy succeeds and our economy gross when everybody says getting a fair shot and everybody is getting a fair shake. we have an economy in which we're growing a vibrant middle i would like to get your reaction on one point in particular. that is this question, particularly in the concept you have given, that you have tried to focus on areas where the evidence is substantial, the threat is imminent, where there is a particularly persuasive case, that the targeted killing of americans is warranted. in that kind of case, the you believe that the president should provide an individual class, that it gross from the middle out, not from the top down. over the next four years as i work with this caucus and every caucus, the question i will ask myself on every item, every issue is this helping to make sure that everybody has a fair shot and everybody is doing their fair share and everybody is plague by the same rules. i believe that is a growth
5:40 pm
american with the opportunity to surrender before killing them? >> i have not spoken about any specific operations -- >> i am talking about the concept because you talk about the concept. imminent threats, serious evidence, grave concern, and certainly words that strike, according to me, and that is why i would be interested in your thoughts weather in those kinds of instances the president ought agenda, not just an equity agenda pap. that is when we have grown fast. that means what you will hear from me next week, i'm going to talk about making sure that we're focused on job creation here in the united states of america. [cheers and applause] it means we're focused on education and that every young person is equiped with the to give, should give, individual americans the opportunity to surrender. >> that's use the example of al qaeda, because if an american were to join al qaeda, we have said, openly, repeatedly, that we are at war with al qaeda. we have set out kind that is trying to kill americans, and that we will do everything possible to protect the lives of american citizens from these murderous attacks. we have signaled this world skills they need to compete in the 21st century. it means that we got an energy agenda that can make us less depent on foreign oil but we're also cultivating clean energy strategy that will maintain our leadership well into the future. it means that we're going to talk about, yes, deficits and taxes and sequesters and potential government shutdowns,
5:41 pm
wide. we repeatedly have said it openly. any american he joins al qaeda will know full well that they have joined an authorization that is at war with the united states and has killed thousands upon thousands of individuals, many of of whom were americans. in american who did that should know well that they in fact are part of an enemy against us and that the united states will do everything possible to destroy that enemy to save american debt ceiling, we'll talk about that stuff. but we'll talk about it from the perspective on how we're making sure someone works hard in this country. a cop, teacher, a construction worker, or a reception worker, they can make it if they work hard. their kids can make it and dream bigger dreams than they have achieved. obviously, a lot of what we'll lives. >> and i certainly, and i said this at the very beginning, i certainly want to be part of that effort to fight al qaeda on all of these key fronts. i just want to have some answers, and a i will give you another chance, whether you think the president should give an individual american fortunately to surrender? i a think senator king talked and i commend o, be working on over the next few weeks is going to be on how do we deal with this sequester issue. i want to make this quick point. i had a press conference this week in which i reiterated that i'm prepared, eager, and ang shouse that ends this government by crisis that every two week or every two months or every six
5:42 pm
you for saying you are open to hearing about that. this is something that can be set in motion in a straightforward way as a general principle, and i am not talking about any one individual, and you have answered the question, and i will not go any further, unless you want to add anything to it. the other point i would say is months we are threatening this hard recovery, are finally housing is picking up and real estate is doing better and unemployment numbers are still too high. we're geing job growth and manufacturing is doing well and we continue to have these self-inflicted crisis here in washington where suddenly someone taps the brakes. what i said this week was i want we have covered a lot of ground today, and as far as i'm concerned, we have got a lot of ground still to cover. i have made it clear that we have got to see any and all of those legal opinions, once that a bipartisan group of senators asked for, before the vote at your credit you said you would take the message back to the white house. because what it really goes to, mr. brennan, is this question of to do something big to provide certainty to american families. that means a balanced package that will reduce our long-term deficit and debt but that still allows us to invest in those things that we need to grow right now. [cheers and applause] that is also a deficit reduction agenda that is growing faster. in other words to have a
5:43 pm
checks and balances. and we probably did not use that word and off this afternoon, because i think that is really what this is all about. a constitution gives the president the significant power to protect our country, and dangerous times, unfettered power. it is power that is balanced through this special system that ensures a congressional oversight, and that is why these balanced package that means we have done a lot of cuts, we've done some revenue now. so the rest of the way moving forward we can do some additional reforms and make our health care programs work better. we can cut out programs we don't need. it also means we have to be able to close some tax loopholes that questions that i and others at and try to get at in terms of congressional oversight, being able to get all of the opinions that are relevant to the legal analysis for targeting americans, and then to learn more about how you are going to bring the public into the discussion. certainly you have been patient this afternoon, and i want you to know we have covered a lot of crap, but i think we have a lot to go, -- we have covered a lot the average american cannot take advantage of, raise the revenue to do the job that allows us to continue to grow. the reason this is relevant because i gather, i haven't gotten this from first-hand sours -- sources but our friends on the other side of the aisle is we're concerned about the sequester. we recognize that cutting the
5:44 pm
of ground, but i think we have a lot to go. >> any member of al qaeda, a u.s. citizen or not, needs to know they have the ability to surrender anytime, anywhere throughout the world, and they can do so before their organization is to strike. we will destroy that organization, and u.s. citizens can surrender any time. >> just on that point, i do not federal spending with a meat ax opposed to with a scalpel will damage our national security, our educational service, we'll have kids getting kicked off of head-start and people who have disabled kids have less help. they recognize that the sequester is a bad idea but what they suggested is the only way to replace it is for us to cut social security, cut medicare, take a back seat to anybody in terms of citing al qaeda. i asked you a different question, and on the question of what kind of evidence ought to be applied, whether there ought to be geographic limits, the question of whether an individual should be allowed to surrender. for example, there is a question of whether the obligation changes, a valid target has not been publicly reported, so there and not close a single loophole, not raise any additional revenue from the wealthiest americans or corporations who have a lot of lawyers and accountants and are able to maneuver and manage and work the system. i have to tell you that is an argument they want to have before the court of public opinion, that is an argument i'm willing to engage in.
5:45 pm
are issues here, and i think we are going to have to continue discussions,, and, madam, i round.for the spextra >> senator coats. >> i think it may be better held for further discussion last -- next week in the classified room, but this whole idea of [cheers and applause] i believe that the american people understand -- i believe that the american people understand that yes, we need to reduce the deficit but it should not be on the backs of the seniors or the on the backs of the young people who are trying to get a college education, it should not be on the backs of the parent who is are trying to give their kids a better start in life. we all have to participate. it is important that we make sure we have a strong national leaks, nothing upsets me more in this committee, and we have had a lot of these in the last few years, to see something that was discussed in classified areas, written up the next day in the newspapers or on the part of the media, and it drives some of us crazy. it does me, anyway. so maybe i am paranoid about all defense. we need to reduce our spending in a smart way. we should be willing to ask those of us who are luckiest in society to close a few loopholes in deductions that the average american doesn't get. is that the choice that we got, i promise you we can win that debate because we're on the right side of this argument. i expect that you guys will be with me on that. [cheers and applause]
5:46 pm
this and so forth. i cannot totally get my hands around this aqap situation which we discussed earlier, but i will defer that until tuesday so we can discuss in more detail. that may just ask you one question here. you said -- i do not have the date -- the al qaeda core has been dissipated. last point i will make. obviously, economic growth is a priority but making sure that we're opening up opportunity for everybody is also important. that's why immigration reform is so critical. [cheers and applause] i said this is going to be a top priority and an early priority of my administration. i'm heartened to she republicans and democrats starting to be in we see this thing metastasizing now across northern africa and other parts. what is your latest assessment of al qaeda in terms of its control and operation of these smaller efforts that are popping up in different parts of the a serious conversation about getting this done. now is the time. i recognize that the politics aren't always easy, there are regional variations. i understand in some places this may end up being a tough issue. but what i also know is that part of your strength is our youth and our history of attracting talent from all
5:47 pm
middle east and north africa? >> in the past i think the core asserted eight member of the influence over the franchises. it depends on our definition of the core and our ability to disrupt communication between them. aqap, other elements, have warned the global. -- around the globe. i've seen that talent from those who want to serve in the military, want to get an engineering degree, want to help build this country, want to start a business. i want to make sure that american future is secured. i'm going to be pushing hard to get it done early. [cheers and applause] we're also going to make sure we developed as a result of the local environment. they are unique in to us unto themselves. we need to make sure that we are able to work with the governments and intelligenc service is so we can put pressure on them. and number of them have local agendas, and some of them have a collection is as international agendas. aqap in yemen as a effort underway to bring that government down, and the keep the american people safe which means that we're going to continue to work as we draw down our troops in afghanistan to go after those who would attack america. and we've got to be mindful about steps we can take to end the cycle of gun violence in this country and we should do so recognizing that, again, there
5:48 pm
government has done a great job. there are other elements, narcotics smugglers, human traffickers, they involve kidnappings and ransoms, and are involved in terrorist attacks. we need to take into account what the informant is, who we can work with, how to put pressure on them, but any element associated with out carter has as part of its agenda death and destruction. i agree but we need to do is be are regional differences. we should respect those. guns mean something different from someone who grew up in a farm, somebody who grew up in an inner city. there are different realities and we have to respect them. but what we know is that majority of gun owners know that 100 or 1,000 more of our children are shot or killed in a mindful of this metastasis asian of the al qaeda cancer. >> in relationship to some kind of centralized control over all these things and having said that the corps is decimated, it really varies. we see the al qaeda core exerting control over these elements. there is a lot of independence of effort come autonomous efforts that are underway, and i will be happy to talk and concession about the senseless fashion. there are common sense steps we can take to build a consensus around -- we cannot shy away from taking those steps. bottom library is, people we have a lot of work -- bottom line is, we have a lot of work to do. it won't be simple, there will be frustrations. there will be times where you
5:49 pm
relationships that exist between al qaeda cores. >> thank you very much, senator. senator collins. >> thank you, madam chairman. mr. brennan, i want to follow up on the point that senator coats just race, because if you look at a map, back in 2001, you would see that al qaeda was mainly in afghanistan and guys are mad at me. i will occasionly read about it. but, as long as we keep in mind why we came here in the first place. as long as we think back to whatever inspired each of us to say maybe i can give something back. maybe i can make a difference. maybe my purpose here on earth is to not just think about what pakistan. if you look at a map to day, you would see al qaeda in all sorts of countries. that is not to say that there were not cells and other countries back in 2001, but it raises the question in my mind of whether, even though we have been successful in taking out some of the core of al qaeda and is in it for me but what is in it for the broader community, for my neighborhood, for my state, for my cune. we need to keep that in mind every day, i have no doubt that we will continue our extraordinary progress that we've made already. as a by-product of doing that good work and keeping that focus, i would expect that nancy pelosi will be speaker again
5:50 pm
some high-level leaders, whether our strategy is working. if the cancer of al qaeda it is metastasizing, do we need a new treatment? >> what we have tried to do over the past decade and longer is to be able to treat this real cancer in a number of ways. sometimes it takes lethal force, military might, working with our partners in a variety of ways, addressing some of the pretty soon. thank you very much, everybody. god bless you. [cheers and applause] >> we're going to ask -- infrastructural institutional and other disease that exist in these countries that al qaeda takes advantage of. if you look at the geographic map from south asia the middle east and north africa, there has been tremendous political turbulence in that area over the past decade, and particularly in the last couple years. there are a lot of uncovered spaces that outcry has taken advantage of. we have made progress in some areas. somalia is in fact a good >> john brennan is president obama's counterterrorism advisory and has a 25 year career with the c.i.a. he's been nominated by the president to head that agency. his hearing was today and we'll show it to you tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern. on our next "washington journal" we'll talk about al ja zee a --
5:51 pm
example of a place where we have worked with neighboring countries, local government, with a multilateral element in supress to try to sp jazeera. we'll discuss a report that concludes that on ranch that americans die sooner and have higher rates of disease than people in other countries. dr. steven wolf on human needs. "washington journal" begins tomorrow and every day at 7:00 eastern. host: joining us on the "washington journal" is the senator, republican from arizona just elected to his first term. congratulations. i don't know if you heard our conversation about immigration. your group, have you started forming your bipartisan group
5:52 pm
efforts into legislation yet when it comes to immigration? guest: that is happening this month. that is the hard part to put the principles in the legislation. some items have been done before and you can use it as a template. these principles contain new things too. that's the difficult part, obviously. i think that everybody is working in good faith and we stand a far better chance of getting it now than we have before. host: when you say your principles continue new thing, such as? guest: as the path to citizenship. the act that i introduced where someone who is here and they want to advance their status and you have to pay back taxes. we had a touchback provision, go back to your home country and register, this is not here but this still requires back tax, fine, way to get back in the
5:53 pm
back of the line. for those who say it is an amnesty, that is not the probably definition of an amnesty that will is a pardon of a breach of law. this is not a pardon. this is no cutting in line that is what defines amnesty to me. host: what you have read about the president's proposal, is there anything in there that is a non-starter? guest: there are things that the president left out. you mentioned some of the new thing tons other side is border security. we've got to ensure -- people who are living on the border in particular and i'm in touch with the ranchers that hold property there. there is one rancher who had 29 incursions across his property. that is trucks coming across the border with drugs since may.
5:54 pm
for those who say the border is secure, not by a proper definition. we need to do work so the language to make sure individual -- property holders at the border and other community leaders have some input as to what constitutes a secure border. that is important and the president left that out as he did the temporary worker program on the backside. that has to be in the legislation as well. host: are they the same as in indiana or minnesota, or north dakota? guest: i would say arizona has those problems and then sum because we're a border state. if you're on the border and you hold property there, if you are in the communities along the border you face issues that people in indiana that don't. there are additional issues as
5:55 pm
well. ing >> host: you were quoted as saying senator rubio is key. why? guest: he has a perspective that others don't. he's from florida, he's hispanic , he's a very articulate voice on this subject and one that can unify republicans around this. i don't think there is anyone in the party that speaks to opportunity and inclusiveness like rubio does. you see him go out to conservative media and talk about immigration in ways that the rest of us can't. so he's done a great job and he's going to be a lynch pen in this effort. host: now that you moved to tore side of the capitol. how do you read the house when it comes to immigration?
5:56 pm
guest: there's a lot of people who still don't want to deal with this issue, i'm not going to deny that. at least everybody wants to see it in the rearview mirror. if we can get it done it will help. i'm not under any illusion that on the political side that if we do this as republicans 50% of the hispanic vote will come our way. that won't be the case for a while. but we should do this for policy reasons and good politics will follow there after. i think this is just an important thing to do. i think it has been a while overdue. host: who are the members of your group working on immigration? guest: there are the schumer, and dick durbin, myself, john mccain, marco rube bee yo.
5:57 pm
-- rubio. host: have you gotten more that wants to join your effort at this point? guest: not people who want to join but they are sympathetic about what we're doing and i think if they see the legislation they will come on board. once they see what is required for someone to advance their status to get on a path to citizenship they will say if this works with the rule of law. it is something that is humane, realistic, and something that we just have to do. host: do you have people on the house side working with you? guest: there is a group working on their own for a while, a bipartisan group. it is people like biden, many others have been involved in
5:58 pm
this effort. they are getting closer, i think, to something like the senate is doing and that certainly helps. host: senator from arizona is our guest. we have our phone lines up if you would like to dial in. we have set aside our fourth line for illegal immigrants. we would like to hear your story and we're going to begin with a caller on that line. alex from germantown, maryland. caller: i'm not illegal myself but my mother is. she came here to put me through college and to raise our living status and help our family back home to come out of poverty. she had a difficult time to try to legalize her status. it has been dragging out for 10 years. she has applied, spent a lot of money for lawyers and
5:59 pm
application fees and paperwork is not cheap. she's been denied. she had to appear, reapply, and basically, she's done everything she can. on my side, i'm a student on a student visa. i kept my visa for the last 10 years and it has not been an easy year for me either. what i found out in my own experience is the people who can get in line and enter the process, at least from where i come from, people already have high living standards and don't need it. in many cases they don't want it. the problem we're having is the people who really need to come here, the people who will benefit the most from legal immigration are being denied. the people who do have the opportunity they don't, in many
6:00 pm
cases, they don't want it. i talk to people who have a green card they come here every two years for a week or two so they don't lose the green card. they don't like living here because the culture shock is tremendous. it is not easy to come here to a country where people speak a different language and have different backgrounds. it is so different. people who come here, who are willing to come here are having a difficult time living at home and they escape violence or they try to escape poverty. host: thanks for sharing your story. what would you like to say to that caler? guest: alex brings up point that has been made recently. the common notion is that everyone here wants to become a citizen. that is not the case. in the case of -- take one
6:01 pm
country, mexico. i think only 36% of those offered a path to citizenship take it. after the 1986 amnesty when that path was made easy under this new package that we're talking about now. so a lot of people don't want to become citizens but for those who do, i think there should be a pathway for them where they are not cutting in line but one they can come out of the shadows without fear on deportation or without fear on being turned away for work. that is what we're after here. host: from florida, the republican line. caller: actually, i'm an independent. i used to be a resident of tucson. i'm contrasting him between the
6:02 pm
gentleman you had earlier. you say path immigration but it is called naturalization. you people have a way, how be it how long it takes to become americans. you don't a right to become an american. we should be selective on who we bring in. the other calls and the other guests comments where he is trying to con flight people saying we don't like illegal and we don't like illegals is stupid. i expect it out of him but i'm kind of disappointing that you are, especially going on with rubio. he has voted if the re-authorization of the patriot act. i was not impressed with him. host: i think we got your point. let's get a response from the senator. guest: with regards of
6:03 pm
naturalization, there are some who think people who come here and have broke an law to get here by crossing the border should never be on the that path to citizenship. i should point out that under current law people who are here illegally can go home and wait 10 years and then get on a path to citizenship. what we're saying is if you're here illegally and you want to be a path to be a citizen, get out of shadows and get a status that allows you work but you to pay a fine and just to get a green card, under this package, not for citizenship. then you will wait until everyone who is currently in the line to go in the line. there is some value that if someone is going to be here 20, 30 years i want them to have the prospect of becoming a citizen.
6:04 pm
that is good, not a bad thing. i think we differ there. host: where do state rights fits in this immigration debate? guest: arizona has been extremely frustrated, lawmakers there and community leaders, and everybody there with the slow pace of the reform with the federal law. arizona has tried to put forward their own laws to enforce federal law. it is difficult. the border, obviously is controlled by the federal government as most labor laws. so there is a limit on what the state can do and i think arizona is pressed up against that limit. that's why we're trying to get the legislation through to help states like arizona as. host: our next caller is from jacksonville. ask your question or make your
6:05 pm
statement. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to state that basically i'm speaking for the hispanic community. i want to state that we have made a huge contribution to the economy and the culture of the united states. we are not a threat. we come here goals and dromes and we work and we pave the way for our children and our children's children so they can see what we were not able to achieve in the other country. we come here just like every immigrant that chirmse with hope. we -- comes here with hope. it seems to many americans that
6:06 pm
is what we appear to be. host: are you citizen or you illegal? caller: i am a citizen and my parents, when my parents came to this country in the 1950's it was a different ball game. they got their green card and with them, all of their children got their green card at the same time. after completing the process which was five years and meeting all the requirements we became -- we all became citizens. well, the republicans want to win elections, i have news for you. it has to be a change of heart. as senator mccain election, election, election. that is the wrong statement to say. if any immigrant says that's all they care, it is not going change the future.
6:07 pm
it has to be a change of heart. host: all right, le get a response. guest: i love that you say senator john mccain because he has been working long before this election, he's been trying to get immigration reform through. those who come here and wanting the best for they families. people ask what brought me to this table and why am i working on this? i'm from arizona, this is important to our state. i grew up on a ranch and a farm in northern arizona. i worked alongside the mexican my grint labor there. i saw they came to make a life for their family better than they could have had otherwise. i never been able to look at all those who come across the board illegally as place them all in the same criminal class. it just doesn't work for me.
6:08 pm
i think for the most part, the vast majority of those who have come across simply want a better life. i think that we stand to benefit, obviously, the benefit of them and we benefit as well. host: we have the next caller from florida. caller: i appreciate you taking my call and i appreciate the senator being part of the discussion. i just want to put on the table that republicans and people that move the hatred against immigrants, they don't pay the price as we are paying. it hurts everybody who calls everybody that don't have documents illegal against the immigrants that serve them in the past.
6:09 pm
i know people who paid the ultimate price. even though they came across the border, that is not my case -- but life changes without our expectations. we have kids. i have for american children. >guest: were they born in the u? caller: yes. guest: you said you are out of status -- does that mean? caller: we came here with a student visa. sometimes we cannot hold a university class. we get into a mode out of status. we do not have a legal status. there is no way under the current law to be legal. we do our best, we pay a lot of taxes. when we go buy a car and finance, we pay up to 30%. it is very hard with the rhetoric from the republicans,
6:10 pm
from john mccain -- the hatred coming from romney hurts us. we do our best. we take our children to school. they pledge allegiance to the flag. it is difficult. guest: where are you from originally? caller: from brazil. guest: when you hear the term living in the shadows, have you had to do that? caller: it is the most true of our situation. we cannot call the police because the chair of -- sheriff here in my hometown -- i do not want to say the name. he is like joe r pio -- arpaio./ we cannot call him to our home because there is a threat of arresting you. my county has been a place where immigrants cannot put their faces out in the street. the point i want to make -- guest: we have to leave it
6:11 pm
there. let's see what the senator has to say. host: andre is in a class where there are a lot more people than is realized. they came over legally and overstayed a visa. 40% of the population is undocumented now -- they did not sneak across the border, but came legally and overstayed. we need better documentation of entry and exit. that has to come with this legislation. i want to make a point -- andre talks about hatred that is out there. i think there is less of that than people think. i think people in arizona are often cast that way because arizona has been trying to deal with a problem that the federal government has simply failed at. i see a lot less of the hatred than some people do. people simply want the rule of law and want us to actually do something about this massive problem that we have.
6:12 pm
the biggest problem is that the law does not recognize the reality that is out there. andrei has kids who are here that our citizens. there are many who are here with undocumented status that have ties that bind, and it is a very difficult situation and a complex situation, maybe more so than is realized. we simply need law that reflects reality and will bring back the rule of law. when you say that republicans have hatred or whatever, i do not buy it. we need a law that reflects reality. >host: how would your legislation, as you see it,, benefit? how does it effect andre? host: if andre has committed no felonies -- those with criminal records will not be allowed to have provisional status and day and hope to advance their status.
6:13 pm
that if he is here and has not committed crimes, then he would be given provisional status. his children are already citizens, so there is no need there. andre would be here for maybe five to six years. then, depending on where -- he could come out of the shadows, would not have the fear of law enforcement if there is an issue in his home or elsewhere. we are trying to get people out of the shadows and not worry about deportation. people have committed crimes -- they ought to worry about deportation. but we should not allow them to advance their status. that is what we really want to do, bring people out of the shadows and have legislation that would come to law that actually reflects reality in this country and is compassionate, but also respects the rule of law. guest: what is -- host: what is
6:14 pm
your opinion of sheriff joe arpaio? hostguest: i will not fall local officials for trying to solve a problem we have failed to deal with in washington. host: you're on with senator jeff flake of arizona. caller: thank you for your time, and thank you to c-span. i actually had a question for the earlier guest, but i would just as soon hear your comment. i want to hear how the system is broken. is it really broken, or does it just take too much time and people do not want to take the time to do that? a reference to the law and to rules -- we are a nation of law, and if we pick and choose which ones we are going to enforce and which ones we will keep, and we are not a nation of laws anymore. we need to protect that. how is that system broken?
6:15 pm
my final comment, in general, if our nation is going to go down into troubles and -- i would rather be standing on the side of being conservative and holding some lines and not be reelected and go down in history as having taken a stand rather than just go down in history as getting along. host: thank you. let's get a response from the senator. guest: you mentioned it is broken -- i would say they are. we do not have laws that reflect reality. an example -- in 1986, some 3 million people who were here illegally were offered a path toward citizenship. 40% of them took it. but that law that was passed in 1986 was not complete. it did not foresee the labor needs that we would have in this country after that time. it did not contain a robust
6:16 pm
temporary worker plan thereafter. it was basically thought, if we make those who are here illegally now legal then we have solved the labor problem. it did not solve the labor problem. when that law was signed, it was out of date already because we had additional labor needs that were not contemplated. the promises that were made about securing the border after that were ignored because we needed more labor. that is why we have the big problem we have today. that is why this law that we are working on now in this legislation has to include a temporary worker program sufficient to account for our labor needs. both the low skill side and the high-tech side. if we have laws that reflect reality, then it is much easier to enforce those laws. i would argue that we do have a broken system, and the first
6:17 pm
order of business is to pass realistic legislation which we can enforce. host: a tweet in -- why does it take so long to obtain legal status? guest: a lot of people who have been waiting and are going through the legal process -- we should not allow those who have come here illegally, we should not allow them to jump in line. that is what was done in 1986. that is the definition, i believe, of amnesty. it will take a while, but we could expedite those who are coming in now legally and perhaps shorten that line, but for somebody who is here illegally now and wants to take a path to citizenship, if this legislation were to pass, i would think it would take probably 10-15 years for them to advance and become a citizen and have those responsibilities
6:18 pm
and rights that come with citizenship. it is a long and arduous process, but it is possible. >host: good morning, you are on c-span. caller: i am a legal citizen. i am married to a us citizen. my kids are citizens. i own three houses -- one of them is not paid yet. when i came in with a visa, the fiancée visa -- she was my cousin and i had to marry after three months when i got here. we did not get married because she went back to her ex- boyfriend. she left me out of the house. what happened, i came here and
6:19 pm
after i get married to my wife who is a citizen, they told me i have to leave the country. and i could not leave because i had just bought my first house and had my first kids. they told me i had to wait for 10 years. that is why i stayed. my house, which i've had for more than 15 years, my kids are all grown-up, all doing good, financially i'm doing fine and have no problem at all. but my father just died back home -- i could not go because i am in the goal -- illegal. i do not want to go back, because i would have to wait 10 years. host: i think we got the specifics. let's see what the senator has
6:20 pm
to say. guest: this is a case that people sometimes will make, take a position and say we cannot let anybody who is here illegally stay. they ought to have to go home for 10 years. i can tell you, i am sure they may hold that position for everybody else, but he is a special case. he has a great family, he is doing what he should, contributing to the economy. he is a special case. i can tell you, there are a lot of special cases out there when you look at this. i think he just points out the complexity of this problem. under this legislation, it is a long path toward citizenship. i should add, those who are here and wish to stay and wish to get on that path and come out of the shadows immediately and have legal status -- they will not have to live in the shadows anymore. but these are complex situations, and what happens with everything, if you know
6:21 pm
somebody who has the situation, they are your friend or your friend's friend, you tend to feel differently about them. that is why we have got to do this legislation and keep working. host: what has been the reaction from the conservative wing of your party? guest: by and large it has been a much better reaction, much more accommodating reaction than it has been a few years ago. i have been down this road before, pushing comprehensive legislation. in arizona we obviously have a border situation that we need to solve. that is why i am excited about this. for the first time we will have real leverage and make sure board and security -- border security happens. in arizona we have a situation we have not had before in 88 miles of our border. we have operational control.
6:22 pm
basically, if somebody crosses illegally we have a reasonable expectation of catching them. we just do not have anything approximating that in the tucson sector, which is much of the rest of the border. if we can make the tucson sector look like the yuma sector, then we can really advance and move this legislation. i think it can be done, but it is not going to be -- as i mentioned, we have people on the border who have suffered through this for a long time, particularly the last couple of years, drug smuggling, human smuggling that has come. i'm excited that this legislation offers us the possibility to actually have a commission that has real input as as to what a secure border means. it is not, as some people assume, a way to stop this legislation or up somebody on a path to citizenship. it is just leveraged to ensure we finally do secure the border. host: if you open the border and
6:23 pm
stop the iraq war, the border can once again be peaceful and beautiful. guest: if he is talking for a legal framework for people to work and return home as under a temporary worker program -- most of the people are here do not -- who are here do not desire citizenship. a one-two, and work and be able to return home. in previous times, when we had a legal framework, that is what we have done. we had a circular pattern of migration. now we have kind of a settled pattern. it is expensive and dangerous to cross that border. so people tend to come and stay because they cannot go back. then all the costs are incurred by arizona and elsewhere. host: what about the legalization of drugs issue? do you see change in that policy? guest: i do not and am not
6:24 pm
advocating it. host: they tweet -- our own people have no jobs and are struggling. our country is going broke and they want to bring in more -- we cannot afford it. guest: that is a good point. we need a growing economy. i should point out the economy in mexico is growing at a pretty rapid pace, double-digit right now. our economy is struggling. there are areas in our economy where we still need help. however, on the high-tech side we have a situation where we can bring in -- we are already educating a lot of people in the stem fields in the universities and forcing them to return home when they could be here creating jobs and helping the job situation. in the agricultural sector, in yuma, arizona, you have thousands of people crossing the border every day, rear working -- working the fields and returning the field. a lot of them are american
6:25 pm
citizens who simply live in mexico because it is cheaper. you have situations in agriculture where we still need labor. gueshost: you are on with senatr flake. caller: i have been waiting 10 minutes. i would like to say, all of us -- i am a descendent of slaves. we did not come here looking for jobs. we were brought here under an oppressive system. we came in 1619, before the pilgrims landed. people forget, they had slavery in new york and a lot of other places in the east. this was 1865 for us to get free. then we could not vote. i am from texas. host: when it comes to immigration reform now, what
6:26 pm
would you like to see? i would like to see it happen. this country has always wanted cheap labor. let me explain something to you here in texas -- i have had fire in my house, roof repair, foundation repair, driveway repair. when i call the local company, it is a caucasian who comes out and represents the company. it is a local small business. the chamber of commerce supports. when the people who come here to do the work, are illegals, a lot of them, and i think they are because some of them cannot beat the language. but these people are making money off of these people. i think it is disgusting. i think they need to come out of the shadows and have some type of legal status.
6:27 pm
host: thank you. guest: i agree. that is the tenor of this legislation, to get people out of the shadows and have a law that we can enforce and hold the rule of law here. host: to very quickly change the topic -- two other questions. you said on tuesday that delaying the spending cuts in the sequester for a short time only allows more time to come up with a way to avoid them altogether. when it comes to the sequester, should be be allowed to go through? guest: i would prefer to do what we did in the house twice -- legislation that says we need to be hit the spending reduction targets, but hits defense a little hard. so it ought to be done differently. but unless we are going to hit those reduction targets, we have to let it go through. host: you are on the judiciary committee -- an issue that
6:28 pm
might be in front of you is the american airlines-u.s. airways potential merger. u.s. airways is headquartered in phoenix. guest: they had better keep those slots in the national airports so i can continue to fly direct. i am pretty parochial as far as that is concerned. but u.s. airways has been great for the state and great for maricopa county. i do not want to get in the middle of that. host: do you think the judiciary committee will have to look at it? it depends on how it is structured. i am sure taking that into account. there are good people involved in negotiations. i will let them finish their work. host: at this point, would you support it? guest: yes. i think everybody is negotiating in good faith. host: i last call comes from st. paul, minnesota on are a legal immigrants line. good morning. you are on c-span. caller: good morning.
6:29 pm
host: tell us your story. caller: my question -- some comments, and then a question. for someone who is a legal, -- illegal, who comes to this country thinking about working and has four kids, my oldest one is eight years old -- 18 years old. she needs to go to congress. i do not know -- college. i do not know how we can have college for her. i have been not given jobs many times because i do not have documents -- i do not have social security. i worked for nine years and they kicked me out from the job because they asked me for social security. they told me, either go to the social security office and ask them for a social security
6:30 pm
because many people in this country have no idea how to get on social security. my question is, after i was kicked from the job many times, and now preparing for immigration reform, they think you have to pay fines, pay back taxes, which i do not know what they are talking about because you are paying tax on your check -- then they kick you from the job many times. when will they have the money to pay the fines they are talking about? host: where are you from originally? >> from cape verde. i, on a tourist visa. host: and state -- was that your
6:31 pm
intention when you came over? were you planning on just staying once you got in? guest caller: no. after the visa -- i hold my visa for at least two months and then had a job there. at the time they were reforming the system, the politics system , and then we got into democracy. they had to privatize the companies. i was working at a company for a long time and i was kicked from the job because they were reforms when they privatized. they gave options to the people to leave because they had to indemnifies -- indemnifies them.
6:32 pm
host: we have to leave it there, but we appreciate it. another variation. guest: he was advocating that there be no fines for back taxes. i'm sorry sorry -- we cannot do that. there has to be a penalty or it would be an amnesty, and we are not going to do an amnesty. we will try to make people right with the law and make people be able to come out of the shadows. it may be difficult and might not be possible for some to come up with the money for a final back taxes, but there has to be a penalty, and that is recognized by everyone. host: we do have one last call -- on a republican line. caller: good morning, senator. first of all, i am not a racist and do not have a problem with immigration. what i do have a problem is when i go to the grocery store or anybody else -- they are standing there.
6:33 pm
you have a food stamp in spanish at the end of the cast register, and they go outside and get the brand-new dodge durango and drive it out. what is the deal with this? we are paying their way, they are driving new cars. the guys i talked to -- they're living five people in a basement behind a tarp on a mattress, on a floor, and you think they are in the shadows? they are working every day. get out of the office of there and go have a look. thank you. i am not sure if the are on undocumented status. if they are they should not be if we have a lovely can enforce, it is easier to catch situations like this. -- if we have a lot we can enforce it is easier to catch
6:34 pm
situations like this. sometimes we let people who speak a different language in the the same category and that is dangerous to do. host: have you gone on patrol with the border control? guest: i have. host: what is that like? guest: sometimes with the border patrol, sometimes unannounced or with a local sheriff. i have seen it in a variety of situations. i can tell you, for those who live on the border, those who have property there, the ranchers in particular in that situation, they are worried. we have -- had a murder of a rancher just two years ago. there is a justifiable fear that unless we get better border security, that their lives are risk. their property is certainly at risk. we do not have a secure border yet. it is better, we have more officers with better technology, better barriers, but we are still not there. so we need more. >host: finally, no chance the
6:35 pm
democrats will make any deal that improves the wave -- wages panics the republicans. guest: that may be a cynical way to look at it. i can tell you there are a number of democrats who want to do this for the right reasons. that reflects the position of those who were in this group. there may be some who wanted just for political purposes, but we will assume the best and move ahead. host: senator jeff flake, republican of arizona, thank you for being here. [captioning performed bynational captioning institute][captions copyright nationalcable satellite corp. 2013]>> tomorrow we talk about al jazeera's new english channel. the inspector general for the troubled asset relief program questions about her criticism of the treasury department for approving excessive pay for executives at firms that received taxpayer bailouts
6:36 pm
during the financial crisis. we will also discuss a report that concludes that americans die sooner and at higher rates of disease then people in other high income countries. dr. steven wolfe, director of the virginia commonwealth university center on human needs. washington journal, live every day at seven o'clock -- seven: 00 eastern. outgoing defense ceremony -- secretary leon panetta is being honored tomorrow. they will speak about his time as the nation's 23rd defense secretary. live on c-span at 3:45 tomorrow afternoon. today, secretary canada and the chairman of the joints chiefs testified about the attack on the us on slip in benghazi, libya. here is some of secretary panetta's opening statement. >> on that tragic day, as
6:37 pm
always, the department of defense was prepared for a wide range of contingencies. i will just remind you that the and ctc -- nctc, six months prior to the attack, identified 280 threats to us diplomats, diplomatic facilities, embassies, ambassadors, and consulates worldwide and obviously benghazi was one of those almost 300 areas of concern. but unfortunately, there was no specific intelligence or indications of imminent attack on the us facility in benghazi. without an adequate warning, there was not enough time, given the speed of the attack, four armed military assets to respond.
6:38 pm
that is not just my view or gender dempsey's view. it was the view of the accountability review board that studied what happened on that day. in the months and the tragedy, at the temporary mission facility in the nearby annex in benghazi, we have learned there were actually two short duration attacks that occurred is six hours apart. again, there was no specific intelligence that indicated that a second attack would occur at the annex located two miles away. the bottom line is this -- we were not dealing with a prolonged or continuous assault which could have been brought to win end by us military response. although we had forces deployed to the region.
6:39 pm
time, distance, a lack of an adequate warning, even said moved very quickly on the ground, prevented a more immediate response. >> tonight we will show you that hearing in its entirety, beginning at 8:00 eastern on the c-span2. >> there is no prescription or role model or cookbook for being first lady. if you look back at the lives of martha washington or abigail adams or dolly madison or edith wilson or eleanor roosevelt or maybe eisenhower, you can see that each woman has defined the role in a way that is true to herself. how she can help her husband take care of her family, make your contribution to our nation. >> c-span's new original series
6:40 pm
-- their public and private lives, interest, and influences on the president through 44 administrations. produced with the historical association. serious -- season one begins presidents' day on c-span, c- span radio, and >> what i have discovered as i got older and more mature is that the absolute worst strategy to achieve happiness in life is to make that your primary goal. if you make happiness when you are striving for, you will not achieve it. instead you will end up being narcissistic and self involved, caring about your own pleasures and your own satisfactions in life as your paramount goal. what i have found is that happiness is best thought of as a byproduct of other things. it is a byproduct of meaningful work, and family, and friends, and good health, and love, and
6:41 pm
care. we get happiness not by aiming directly for it, but by throwing ourselves into life project involving ourselves and fundamentally trying to have integrity and be a good person. >> the whole foods cofounder and ceo examines how the inherent good of business and capitalism can lead to a better world. sunday night on 9:0 zero on c- span. find more book tv online -- like us on facebook. >> now, some of this morning's national prayer breakfast in washington. we will hear from pediatric bureau surgeon benjamin carson. >> thank you so much. mr. president, mr. vice president, ms. obama, distinguished guests, which includes everybody. thank you so much for this
6:42 pm
wonderful honor to be at this stage. again, i was here 16 years ago, and the fact they have invited me back means i did not offend too many people. that is great. i want to start by reading for texts that will put into context what i have to say. proverbs 11:9 -- the godless destroys his neighbor, but through knowledge the righteous escapes. proverbs 11:12 -- the man who lacks judgment derides his neighbor, but a man of understanding holds his tongue. proverbs 11:20 5 -- a generous man will prosper. he refreshes others with himself -- who refreshes others will himself be refreshed. if my people who are called by my name will foll and pray and n from their wicked ways, then we
6:43 pm
will forgive their sins. i had an opportunity to speak at a lot of venues. this is my fourth speech this week. i have an opportunity to talk to a lot of people. i have been asking people what concerns you, what are you most concerned about in terms of the spirituality and the direction of our nation and our world? i have talked to very prominent democrats, very prominent republicans, and i was surprised by the uniformity of their answers. those have informed my comments this morning. it is not my intention to offend anyone. i have discovered, however, in recent years that it is difficult to speak to a large group of people and not offend someone. people walk around with
6:44 pm
feelings on their shoulders, waiting for you to say something -- did you hear that? and they cannot hear anything else you say. the pc police are out in force at all times. i was talking to a group about a difference between a human brain and a dog brain. a man got offended -- you cannot talk about a dog brain. [laughter]he focused in on that and completely missed the point of what you were saying. point whered a people are afraid to talk about what they want to say because somebody might be offended. people are afraid to say merry christmas at christmas time. it does not matter whether the person is jewish or whether they are any religion. that is a salutation, a greeting of goodwill. we have got to get over this sensitivity. it keeps people from saying what they really believe. i am reminded of a successful young businessman.
6:45 pm
he loved to buy his mother exotic gifts for mother's day and ran out of ideas. then he ran across these birds. they cost $5,000 apiece, they could dance, they could sing, they could talk. he bought two of them and send them to his mother, could not wait to call him. what did you think of those birds? she said, they were good. [laughter]he said, no, no, you did not eat those birds. they cost $5,000 -- they could dance, sing, talk. she said, they should have said something. [laughter]that is where we end up to if we do not speak up for what we believe. what we need to do -- [applause]what we need to do in this pc world is forget about
6:46 pm
unanimity of speech and unanimity of thought. we need to concentrate on being respectful to those people with whom we disagree. that is when we begin to make real progress. one last thing about political correctness, which i think is a horrible thing, by the way. i am very, very compassionate, and i am not ever out to offend anyone, but pc is dangerous. this country, one of the founding principles, freedom of thought and freedom of expression. it puts a muzzle on them. and at the same time, keeps people from discussing important issues well the fabric of their society is being changed. we cannot fall for that trick. what we need to do is start talking about things, things that are important.
6:47 pm
things that were important in the development of our nation. one of those things was education. i am very passionate about education because it made such a big difference in my life, but here we are at a time in the world, the information age, the age of technology, and yet 30% of people who enter high school in this country do not graduate. 44% of people who start a four- year college program do not finish it in four years. what is that about? think back to a darker time in our history, 200 years ago, when slavery was going on. it was illegal to educate a slave, particularly to teach them to read. why do you think that was? because when you educate a man, you liberate a man. there i was as a youngster,
6:48 pm
lacing myself in the same situation because i was not taking advantage of the education. i was a horrible student. my classmates thought i was the stupidest person in the world. i was the butt of all the jokes. admittedly, it was a bad environment. my mother and father had gotten divorced. she was one of 24 children, had a horrible life. discovered that her husband was a bigamist, had another family. she only had a third-grade education. she had to take care of us in dire poverty. all horrible temper, poor self- esteem, all the things you think would preclude success. but i had something very important. i had a mother who believed in me. i had a mother who would never allow herself to be a victim, no matter what happened. never made excuses, and never
6:49 pm
accepted an excuse from us. if we ever came up with an excuse, she always said, do you have a brain? if the answer was yes, she said, you can sort your way out of it. it does not matter what anybody else did or said. it was the most important thing she did for my brother and myself. if you do not accept excuses, pretty much be -- pretty soon people stop giving them and start looking for solutions. that is a critical issue when it comes to success. well, we did live in dire poverty, and one of the things that i hated was poverty. some people hate spiders, some people hate snakes. i hated poverty. i could not stand it. but my mother could not stand the fact that we were doing poorly in school. she prayed and asked god to give her wisdom. what could she do to get her young sons do understand the importance of developing their
6:50 pm
minds so they can control their own lives? god gave her the wisdom, at least in her opinion. my brother and i did not think it was that wise. it was to turn off the tv and let is only watch two or three programs during the week and with all that spare time read two books apiece and submit to her written book reports, which we could not read but she did not know that. -- we did not know that. [laughter]but i just hated this. my friends were out having a good time. they would say, you cannot make toys stay -- boys stay in the house reading books. they will grow up and hate you. i said, you know they are right, but she did not care. after a while i actually began to enjoy reading those books. we were very poor, but between the covers of those books i could go anywhere, be anybody, do anything. i began to read about people of a, schmidt. as i read those stories, i began to see a connecting thread.
6:51 pm
i began to see that the person who has the most to do with what happens to you in life is you. you make decisions. you decide how much energy you want to put behind that decision. i came to understand that i had control of my own destiny, and at that point i did not hate poverty anymore, because i knew it was temporary. i knew i could change that. it was incredibly liberating for me. it made all the difference. to continue on that theme of education, in 1831, alexis de tocqueville came to america. europeans were fascinated -- how could a fledgling nation already be competing with them on virtually every level? this is impossible. tocqueville was going to sort it out. he looked at our government and was duly impressed by the three branches of government. now because of special
6:52 pm
interest groups, but it was only three in those days. he said wow, this is really something. let me look at their educational system. he was blown away. anybody finishing the second grade was completely literate. he could find a mountain man on the outskirts of society who could read to the newspaper and have a political discussion, tell them how the government works. if you really want to be impressed, take a look at the chapter on education. my latest book, "america the beautiful", which i wrote with my wife. it came out last year. in that education chapter you will see questions extracted from a sixth-grade exit exam from the 1800s. a test you had to have to get your sixth-grade certificate. i doubt most college graduates today could pass that test. we have dumb things down to that level. the reason that is so dangerous is because the people who have heard -- fathered this nation
6:53 pm
said that our system of government was designed for a well-informed and educated populace. when they become less informed, they become vulnerable. think about that. our system of government -- that is why our education is so vitally important. some people say you were overblowing it, things are not that bad. and you're a dr. and a neurosurgeon. why are you concerned about these things? i have news for you. five doctors signed the declaration of independence. doctors were involved in the framing of the constitution, the bill of rights. it is only in recent decades that we have distract -- extracted ourselves, which i think is a mistake. we need scientists and engineered it -- engineers involved in government. not just lawyers. i have nothing against lawyers, but i have to be truthful. [laughter]what do lawyers learn
6:54 pm
in law school? to win by hook or by crook. you have to win. you have all these democrat lawyers and republican lawyers, and both side wants to win death -- both sides want to win. we have to start thinking, how do we solve problems? [applause]before i get shot, let me finish here. [laughter]i do not like to bring up problems without solutions. my wife and i started the carson scholars fund is 16 years ago after we heard about a survey, international survey looking at the ability of eighth graders in 22 countries to solve math and science problems. we came out number 22 -- 21, barely beat out 22. we would see allstate basketball, all-state wrestling,
6:55 pm
the quarterback is the big man on campus. what about the intellectual superstar? what do they get? the national honor decided pain? a pat on the head, there, there, little nerd. nobody cares about us. is there any wonder that these markets try to hide and do not want to be better? this is not helping us as a nation. we started giving out scholarships to students from all backgrounds with superior academic performance and demonstration of humanitarian qualities. unless you cared about other people, it did not matter how smart you were. we do not need those. we need smart people who care about other people. the money would go into a trust that would get interest when they went to college -- they would get the money. also, the school gets a trophy. every bit as impressive as the sports trophies, right out there. they get a medal, they get to go to a banquet. we try to put them on the same
6:56 pm
kind of pedestal we do to all- state athletes. i have nothing against athletics or entertainment. please believe me. i am from baltimore. the ravens won. this is great. but what will maintain our position in the world? the ability to shoot a 25 foot jump shot or the ability to solve an equation? we need to put things into proper perspective. [applause]many teachers have told us, when we put a carson scholar in their classroom, the gpa of the whole class goes up. it has been very gratifying. we started 16 years ago with 25 scholarships in maryland. now we have given out more than 5000 in all 50 states. we also put in reading rooms. these are fascinating places that no little kid could pass up. they get points for the amount of time they spend in the reading room, the number of books they read, and they can trade them in for prizes.
6:57 pm
in the beginning they do it for the prizes, but it is not long before their academic performance begins to improve. we target title i schools where kids come from homes with no books and go to schools with no libraries. those are the ones who drop out. we need to truncate that process early on because we cannot afford to waste any of those young people. for every one of those people that we keep from going down that path of self-destruction and mediocrity, that is one less person you have to protect yourself and your family from, one less person you have to pay for in the penal or the welfare system, one more taxpaying productive member of society who may invent a new energy source or come up with a cure for cancer. they are all important. we need every single one of them. [applause]when you go home tonight, please read about it -- the carson scholars fund.
6:58 pm
why is it so important that we educate people? because we do not want to go down the same pathway as many other nations who have preceded us. i think particularly about ancient rome. a very powerful. nobody could even challenge the militarily. but what happens to them? they destroy themselves from within. moral decay, fiscal irresponsibility, they destroy themselves. if you do not think that can happen to america, you get out your books and start reading. you know, we can fix it. why can we fix it? because we are smart. we have some of the most intellectually gifted people leading our nation. all we need to do is remember what our real responsibilities are so we can solve problems.
6:59 pm
i think about these problems all the time. my role model was jesus. he used parables to help people understand things. and one of our big problems right now, and like i said, i am not politically correct, so i'm sorry. the deficit is a big problem. think about it. our national debt, $16.5 trillion. you think that is not a lot of money? count one number per second -- one number per second. how long will it take you to count to 16 trillion? 500-7000 years. -- 500-7000 -- 5700 years. here is a parable -- a family lands on hard times.
7:00 pm
the father comes to the five children and says, we will have to reduce your allowance. they are not happy about it, but he says, except for johnny and susan, they are special. they get to keep their allowance. in fact, we might give them more. how do you think that will go down? not too well. same thing happens. what about our taxation system? so complex, there is no one who can possibly comply with every tax issue. if i want to get you, i can get you on a tax issue. that does not make any sense. what we need to do is come up with something that is simple. when i pick up my bible, you know what i see? i see the fairest individual in the universe, god, giving us a system. called tight. we do not necessarily have to do it at 10%, but the principle.
7:01 pm
he did not say, if your crops failed to not give me any type of -- tithe/ he did not say if you have a bumper crop give me triple t ithe. there must be something there about proportionality. you have to get rid of the loopholes. [applause] some people say, that is not fair. it does not hurt the guy who made $10 billion is much as the guy who made 1000 -- the guy just put $1 billion in the pot. you do not need to hurt bad. that kind of thinking, that kind of thinking has resulted in 602 banks in the cayman islands. that money needs to be back here building our infrastructure and creating jobs. we are smart enough to figure out how to do that. we have already started down the path to solving the other big problems. health care -- we need to have good health care for everybody. it is the most important thing a
7:02 pm
person can have. money means nothing, titles mean nothing when you do not have your health. we have to figure out efficient ways to do it. we spend a lot of money on healthcare. twice as much per capita as anybody else in the world. yet not very efficient. what can we do? here's my solution. when a person is born, give them a birth certificate, an electronic medical medical record, and a health savings account. to which money can be contributed pre-tax from the time you are born until the time you die. when you die you can pass it onto your family members so that when you're you're 85 years old and have six diseases you are not trying to spend up everything. you are happy to pass it on and there is nobody talking about that. number one. also, for people who are indigent, we can make contributions to their hsa because we already have this huge pot of money. instead of putting it in a
7:03 pm
bureaucracy, let's put it in their hsa. now they have some control over their healthcare. what do you think they will do? they will learn quickly how to be responsible. when he is a diabetic also, he is not going to the emergency room and blowing a big chunk -- he will go to the clinic. he learns that quickly. it's the same treatment. they say, let's get your diabetes under control so you are not back here in three weeks with another problem. that is how we begin to solve these kinds of problems. it is much more complex than that and do not have time to go into it, but we can do all these things because we are smart people. let me just begin to close here with another parable. a sea captain is in -- on the senior where the titanic went down. there is a bright light right there -- another ship. he tells his signaler, signal that ship, deviate 10 degrees to the south. back comes the message -- no,
7:04 pm
you dba 10 degrees to the north. he is a little bit incensed. he says, send a message, this is captain john, deviate 10 degrees to the north. back comes the message, this is anderson fourth class riley. dba 10 degrees to the south. -- deviate 10 degrees to the south. he says, this is a naval destroyer. back comes the message, this is a lighthouse. [laughter]i'm not sad. -- enough said. what about the symbol of our nation, the eagle? an interesting story how we that.e's
7:05 pm
a lot of people think week i'll be bald eagle because it has a bald head -- that is not the reason. it comes from the old english word highball, which means crowned with white. -- piebald, which means crowned with white. why is that eagle able to fly high? because it has two wings. a left-wing and a right wing. [laughter]enough said. i want to close with this story. 200 years ago, this nation was involved in a war, the war of 1812. the british, who are now our good friends, thought that we were young whippersnappers and it was time for us to become a colony again. they were winning the war, marching up the eastern seaboard, destroying city after city. earned down the white house, next up baltimore.
7:06 pm
as they came into the chesapeake bay, the armada of warships as far as the eye can see, it was looking grim. fort mchenry standing right there. general armistead was in charge of fort mckendry. he had a large american flag commissioned to fly in front of the fort. the admiral in charge of the british fleet was offended and said, take that flag down, you have until dusk to take the flag down. if you do not, we will reduce you -- is -- reduce you to ashes. there was a young amateur poet on board all francis scott key, sent to try to obtain the release of an american edition held captive. he overheard the british plan. he mourned as dusk approached, mourned for his fledgling young nation.
7:07 pm
as the sun fell, the bombardment started. bombs bursting in air, so much debris he strained trying to see, but the flag was still there. he could not see a thing all night long. at the crack of dawn he ran out and looked, straining his eyes. all he could see was dust and debris. then there was a clearing, and he beheld the most beautiful sight he had ever seen, the torn and tattered stars & stripes still waving. many historians say that was the turning point in the war of 1812. we went on to win that war and retain our freedom. if you had gone to the ground of fort mchenry that day, you would have seen at the base of that flag the bodies of soldiers who took turns propping up that flag. they would not have a go down because they believed in what that flag symbolized.
7:08 pm
what did it symbolize? one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. thank you. god bless. [applause] >> tonight on c-span, the senate confirmation hearing for cia director nominee john brennan. later, president obama discusses the agenda for his second term at a gathering of house democrats. >> before we get to our first program, here is a look at program, here is a look at another capital
7:09 pm
7:10 pm
7:11 pm
7:12 pm
7:13 pm
7:14 pm
7:15 pm
7:16 pm
7:17 pm
7:18 pm
7:19 pm
7:20 pm
7:21 pm
7:22 pm
7:23 pm
7:24 pm
7:25 pm
7:26 pm
7:27 pm
7:28 pm
7:29 pm
7:30 pm
7:31 pm
7:32 pm
7:33 pm
7:34 pm
7:35 pm
7:36 pm
7:37 pm
7:38 pm
7:39 pm
7:40 pm
7:41 pm
7:42 pm
7:43 pm
7:44 pm
7:45 pm
7:46 pm
7:47 pm
7:48 pm
7:49 pm
7:50 pm
7:51 pm
7:52 pm
7:53 pm
7:54 pm
7:55 pm
7:56 pm
7:57 pm
7:58 pm
7:59 pm

Public Affairs
CSPAN February 7, 2013 5:00pm-8:00pm EST

News News/Business.

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 38, Cia 18, America 14, John Brennan 11, Washington 10, Brennan 9, Mr. Brennan 9, U.s. 6, Benghazi 6, Obama 5, United States 5, John Cornyn 5, Texas 5, Florida 4, Panetta 4, Rubio 4, Nancy Pelosi 4, Al Qaeda 3, Feinstein 3, Graham 3
Network CSPAN
Duration 03:00:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 17 (141 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 2/7/2013